Red-light cameras save lives

By Adrian K. Lund

The red-light runners think they’ve been wronged. They’re convinced that cameras documenting their violations are nothing more than a scheme to pick the pockets of motorists. The truth is simpler: Red-light running kills and red-light cameras save lives. In fact, they saved 159 lives in 2004-08 in the 14 biggest U.S. cities with cameras, a recent Insurance Institute for Highway Safety analysis found.

If cameras had been operating during that period in all cities with populations of more than 200,000, a total of 815 fewer people would have died.Camera opponents don’t acknowledge the connection between those whose red-light running sets off a benign flash and those who cause a deadly collision. Instead, they argue about “big brother” and equate fines for violations with taxes on drivers.

Not everyone who runs a red light is part of this group. Most violators calmly take their lumps paying their tickets and vowing to be more careful. But a vocal minority get angry, and their outrage gets broadcast on the Internet, magnified by the media and channeled into campaigns to ban red-light cameras on the local or state level.

When officials try to assure the public that cameras are about safety, not revenue, they are all but drowned out by the protests of these aggrieved drivers.

In contrast, we rarely hear about the people who are killed and injured by the lawbreakers. People such as Deborah Parsons-Mason, a California mother of four who was fatally struck by a red-light runner while crossing the street near her home; or Marcus May-Cook, a Michigan toddler who was sleeping in his car seat when a red-light runner ended his life after only three years; or Jacy Good, who was permanently disabled and lost both her parents in a red-light running crash just hours after her college graduation in Pennsylvania.

Red-light running kills more than 600 people and injures more than 100,000 each year. Nearly two-thirds of the deaths are people other than the red-light running drivers — occupants of other vehicles, passengers in red light runners’ vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians.
Since the 1990s, communities have used red-light cameras as a low-cost way to police intersections. The number of cities embracing the technology has swelled from 25 in 2000 to more than 500 today.

Without cameras, enforcement is difficult and often dangerous. In order to stop a red-light runner, officers usually have to follow the vehicle through the red light, endangering themselves as well as other motorists and pedestrians. Moreover, the manpower required to police intersections on a regular basis would make it prohibitively expensive. Camera programs can pay for themselves by requiring people who break the law to shoulder the cost of enforcing it.

Some but not all studies have found increases in rear-end crashes when cameras are installed. An increase wouldn’t be surprising because it means drivers who would’ve blown through the light before camera enforcement are now stopping, preventing much more severe side impact crashes.
It’s true that proper engineering of intersections and yellow light timing are key, but they’re not enough by themselves to control aggressive red-light running behavior. In Philadelphia, longer yellow lights reduced red-light running by about a third, but after cameras were installed the remaining violations dropped 96 percent.

An engineering change that eliminates red-light running is to replace traditional intersections with roundabouts. Drivers are forced to pay attention at roundabouts, and with no stoplights or cross traffic, there’s no need for camera enforcement. Unfortunately, not all intersections can be converted to this safer alternative. About 50 Americans lose their lives in red-light running crashes every month, but somehow the people who get tickets because they’ve broken the law have been cast as the victims.

The real victims are the people who are killed or injured by the red-light runners. Research demonstrates that cameras are an effective deterrent. Cities that have had the courage to use them despite the political backlash are saving lives. 

Adrian K. Lund is president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research group funded wholly by automobile insurance companies with the mission of reducing motor vehicle crashes.